Very good , Spacebro , but you forgot to mention other countries help in arming Saddam :

In the early 1970s, Saddam Hussein ordered the creation of a clandestine nuclear weapons program.[23] Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs were assisted by a wide variety of firms and governments in the 1970s and 1980s.[24][25][26][27][28] As part of Project 922, German firmssuch as Karl Kobe helped build Iraqi chemical weapons facilities such as laboratories, bunkers, an administrative building, and first production buildings in the early 1980s under the cover of a pesticide plant. Other German firms sent 1,027 tons of precursors of mustard gas, sarin, tabun, and tear gasses in all. This work allowed Iraq to produce 150 tons of mustard agent and 60 tons of Tabun in 1983 and 1984 respectively, continuing throughout the decade. Five other German firms supplied equipment to manufacture botulin toxin and mycotoxin for germ warfare. In 1988, German engineers presented centrifuge data that helped Iraq expand its nuclear weapons program. Laboratory equipment and other information was provided, involving many German engineers. All told, 52% of Iraq's international chemical weapon equipment was of German origin. The State Establishment for Pesticide Production (SEPP) ordered culture media and incubators from Germany's Water Engineering Trading.[29][edit]Western help with Iraq's WMD program

Francebuilt Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor in the late 1970s. Israel claimed that Iraq was nearing production of nuclear weapons, and destroyed the French-built reactor in 1981. Meanwhile, Israel's Mossad ran a secret and clandestine operations to either infiltrate Iraqi nuclear program and removed or killed its associated personalities. In 1980, Egyptian born-Iraqi nuclear scientist dr. Yahya El Mashad, head of the Iraqi nuclear program, was assassinated by Mossad. In 1983, a similar operation was undertaken when it was reported that Abdul Rasul, head of Iraqi Osirak reactor, was poisoned in Paris during a lunch, delegated by French officials.[citation needed] Later, a French company built a turnkey factory which helped make nuclear fuel. France also provided glass-lined reactors, tanks, vessels, and columns used for the production of chemical weapons. Around 21% of Iraq’s international chemical weapon equipment was of French origin. Strains of dual-use biological material also helped advance Iraq’s biological warfare program.Italy gave Iraq plutonium extraction facilities that advanced Iraq’s nuclear weapon program along with 75,000 shells and rockets designed for chemical weapons. Between 1979 and 1982 Italy gave depleted, natural, and low-enriched uranium. Swiss companies aided in Iraq’s nuclear weapons development in the form of specialized presses, milling machines, grinding machines, electrical discharge machines, and equipment for processing uranium to nuclear weapon grade. Brazil secretly aided the Iraqi nuclear weapon program by supplying natural uranium dioxide between 1981 and 1982 without notifying the IAEA. About 100 tons of mustard gas also came from Brazil.[citation needed]The United States exported support for Iraq during the Iran–Iraq war over $500 million worth of dual use exports to Iraq that were approved by the Commerce department. Among them were advanced computers, some of which were used in Iraq's nuclear program.[30] The non-profit American Type Culture Collection and the Centers for Disease Control sold or sent biological samples of anthrax, West Nile virus and botulism to Iraq up until 1989, which Iraq claimed it needed for medical research. A number of these materials were used for Iraq's biological weapons research program, while others were used for vaccine development.[31] For example, the Iraqi military settled on the American Type Culture Collection strain 14578 as the exclusive anthrax strain for use as a biological weapon, according to Charles Duelfer.[32]In the late 1980s, the British governmentsecretly gave the arms company Matrix Churchill permission to supply parts for Saddam Hussein's weapons program, while British Industry supplied Gerald Bull as he developed the Iraqi supergun. In March 1990, a case of nuclear triggers bound for Iraq, were seized at Heathrow Airport. The Scott Report uncovered much of the secrecy that had surrounded the Arms-to-Iraq affair when it became known.[33] The British government also financed a chlorine factory that was intended to be used for manufacturing mustard gas.[34]Many other countries contributed as well; since Iraq's nuclear program in the early 1980s was officially viewed internationally as for energy production, not weapons, there were no UN prohibitions against it. An Austrian company gave Iraq calutrons for enriching uranium. The nation also provided heat exchangers, tanks, condensers, and columns for the Iraqi chemical weapons infrastructure, which can hardly be said to be for energy. Singapore gave 4,515 tons of precursors for VX, sarin, tabun, and mustard gases to Iraq. The Dutch gave 4,261 tons of precursors for sarin, tabun, mustard, and tear gases to Iraq. Egypt gave 2,400 tons of tabun and sarin precursors to Iraq and 28,500 tons of weapons designed for carrying chemical munitions. India gave 2,343 tons of precursors to VX, tabun, Sarin, and mustard gases. Luxembourg gave Iraq 650 tons of mustard gas precursors. Spain gave Iraq 57,500 munitions designed for carrying chemical weapons. In addition, they provided reactors, condensers, columns and tanks for Iraq’s chemical warfare program, 4.4% of the international sales.China provided 45,000 munitions designed for chemical warfare. Portugal provided yellowcake between 1980 and 1982.Niger provided yellowcake in 1981.[35][edit]Iran–Iraq War

Yes, and let's agree that both sides do it. Romney's son has financial ties to the vote counting machines in Florida and Ohio. Think there's any chance of democratic votes going missing? Google it.... Not to mention the ongoing GOP voter suppression....

_________________Everytime we picked a booger we'd flip it on this one winduh. Every night we'd contribute, 2, 3, 4 boogers. We had to use a putty knife, man, to get them damn things off the winduh. There was some goober ones that weren't even hard...

Wasn't there a political topic especially for those who need to use large fonts and various colours because it makes them feel they're right? Then the people who are wise enough to know not to vote based on somebody's performance in debates, can continue talking about breaking news. This is about as interesting to me as the news that De Efteling will make a new show for Raveleijn together with Puy du Fou is for all of you: fun for yours truly but nothing worth noting for anyone else on this forum.

Yes, and let's agree that both sides do it. Romney's son has financial ties to the vote counting machines in Florida and Ohio. Think there's any chance of democratic votes going missing? Google it.... Not to mention the ongoing GOP voter suppression....

you are correct but if remember Obama campaigned on the fact that his admin would NEVER do it, remember pelosi said they had to drain the swamp, so if you want pure political crap, no economic future and hippie ideology rammed up your ass then obama is your man.

_________________A government Bureau is the closest thing to eternal life on earth that you will ever see

Wasn't there a political topic especially for those who need to use large fonts and various colours because it makes them feel they're right?

If this is pointed towards me , let me explain myself.

I used various colors to highlight the countries names. This was done in much the same method , and with the expected hope , that it will be easier to read , just as italics are used for emphasis.

No more , no less. I don't need to feel right by anyone on this forum.

But ... if you are talking about Spacer's use of large fonts , don't waste your time trying to reason with him. If you do , you will probably end up on the same meds he is on.

On the political side , the Democratic Party just got a 15 million dollar loan from the Bank Of America.

Obama also accepted foreign money >

Chris Walker, a British citizen who lives outside London, told The Post he was able to make two $5 donations to President Obama’s campaign this month through its Web site while a similar attempt to give Mitt Romney cash was rejected. It is illegal to knowingly solicit or accept money from foreign citizens. http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/b ... hyDCRyyrEL

These companies also contributed >

In the financial sector, one and a quarter million dollars have found their way into the Obama campagin. The largest donor was Goldman Sacs at $375,978. JP Morgan Chase was second with $216,459 while Citigroup coughed up $181,787 and Morgan Stanley only produced $109,025 to finance Obama's campaign.Time Warner led the big business contributors to the Obama campaign with $131,485, followed by GE at $47,450 and Microsoft at $44,250.

Now here's where the hypocrite factor comes in.

Every Liberal I have ever met hated ' big corporations ' because they had too much money and shit on the little guy.

Just think , Liberals , without all that ' big corporation ' donations , Obama might not have ever been elected . The private donations would have gone far , for sure , but , far enough to win without the ' big ' money ?

DisclaimerColors are merely used for the slightly sight impaired and are not representative of ' rightness ' or ' wrongness ' .

Every Liberal I have ever met hated ' big corporations ' because they had too much money and shit on the little guy.

You must not get out much, or you like to make exaggerated claims. "Every Liberal I have ever met hated ' big corporations ' ". I consider myself to be liberal leaning but I don't hate hardly anyone or anything. I DO hate the drunk abusive asshole that abused my mother before he died. I do NOT hate big corporations, but I sure as hell don't trust them any more than I trust any politician. The very nature of 'big corporations' and government demands that the participants be dishonest. If they were honest, they would be out of a job. This does not mean I hate them. They are a necessary, corrupt evil.

_________________“The power of pop music to corrupt and putrify the minds of world youth are virtually limitless."

Nothing wrong with hating big companies that screw the little guy and make ungodly amounts of money doing it. I'm fine with rich, big companies if they don't do that. But unfortunately many of them do. Why would anyone stand by getting screwed, at the pump or anywhere else?

If Romney get elected, I guarantee that we'll be seeing a lot more of this...

"We're workers at Bain Capital-owned Sensata, 2520 Walnut St, Freeport, Illinois. We're fighting to save our jobs from being shipped to China by the end of this year. We are calling on Mitt Romney to come to Freeport, IL and we will camp across the street from our plant for as long as it takes! For more information or to get involved email us at bainport@gmail.com To send us some pizza love call Logan's Bar & Grill (815) 232-4592 FEEL FREE TO USE OUR PICTURES just cite Bainport.com Sign our petition here."

a strike at Carnegie Steel's plant at Homestead, Pennsylvania, turned into one of the most violent episodes in the American labor struggles of the late 1800s.

A planned occupation of the plant turned into a bloody confrontation when hundreds of men from the Pinkerton Detective Agency exchanged gunfire with workers and townspeople along the banks of the Monongahela River.

The battle on July 6, 1892 ended with a truce, but the state militia arrived a week later to settle things in favor of the company.

And two weeks later an anarchist outraged by the behavior of Henry Clay Frick, the vehemently anti-labor manager of Carnegie Steel, tried to assassinate Frick in his office. Though shot twice, Frick survived.

Other labor organizations had rallied to the defense of the union at Homestead, the Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel Workers. And for a time public opinion seemed to side with the workers.

But the attempted assassination of Frick, and the involvement of a known anarchist, was used to discredit the labor movement. In the end, the management of Carnegie Steel won.

Background of the Homestead Plant Labor Problems

In 1883 Andrew Carnegie had bought the Homestead Works, a steel plant in Homestead, Pennsylvania, east of Pittsburgh on the Monongahela River. The plant, which had been focused on producing steel rails for railroads, was changed and modernized under Carnegie's ownership to produce steel plate, which could be used for production of armored ships.

Carnegie was known for uncanny business foresight, and he had become one of the richest men in America, surpassing earlier millionaires such as John Jacob Astor and Cornelius Vanderbilt.

Under Carnegie's direction, the Homestead plant kept expanding, and the town of Homestead, which had about 2,000 residents in 1880, when the plant had first opened, grew to a population of about 12,000 in 1892. About 4,000 workers were employed at the steel plant.

The union representing workers at the Homestead plant, the Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel Workers, had signed a contract with Carnegie's company in 1889. The contract was set to expire on July 1, 1892.

Carnegie, and especially his business partner Henry Clay Frick, wanted to break the union. There has always been a lot of dispute about how much Carnegie knew of the ruthless tactics Frick planned to employ.

At the time of the 1892 strike, Carnegie was at a luxurious estate he owned in Scotland, but it seems, based on letters the men exchanged, that Carnegie was fully aware of Frick's tactics.

The Beginning of the Homestead Strike

In 1891 Carnegie began to think about reducing wages at the Homestead plant, and when his company held meetings with the Amalgamated union in the spring of 1892 the company informed the union that it would be cutting wages at the plant.

Carnegie also wrote a letter, before he left for Scotland in April 1892, which indicated that he intended to make Homestead a non-union plant.

In late May, Henry Clay Frick instructed the company negotiators to inform the union that wages were being reduced. The union would not accept the proposal, which the company said was non-negotiable.

In late June 1892, Frick had notices posted about the town of Homestead informing union members that since the union had rejected the company's offer, the company would have nothing to do with the union.

And to further provoke the union, Frick began construction of what was being called "Fort Frick." Tall fences were constructed around the plant, topped with barbed wire. The intent of the barricades and barbed wire was obvious: Frick intended to lock out the union and bring in "scabs," non-union workers.

The Pinkertons Attempted to Invade Homestead

On the night of July 5, 1892, approximately 300 Pinkerton agents arrived in western Pennsylvania by train and boarded two barges which had been stocked with hundreds of pistols and rifles as well as uniforms. The barges were towed on the Monongahela River to Homestead, where Frick assumed they could land in the middle of the night undetected.

Lookouts saw the barges coming and alerted the workers in Homestead, who raced to the riverbank. When the Pinkertons tried to land at dawn, hundreds of townspeople, some of them armed with weapons dating back to the Civil War, were waiting for them.

It was never determined who fired the first shot, but a gun battle broke out. Men were killed and wounded on both sides, and the Pinkertons were pinned down on the barges, with no escape possible.

Througout the day of July 6, 1892, townspeople of Homestead tried to attack the barges, even pumping oil into the river in an attempt to set it on fire. Finally, late in the afternoon, some of the union leaders convinced the townspeople to let the Pinkertons surrender.

As the Pinkertons left the barges to walk to a local opera house, where they would be held until the local sheriff could come and arrest them, townspeople threw bricks at them. Some Pinkertons were beaten.

The sheriff arrived that night and removed the Pinkertons, though none of them were arrested or indicted for murder, as the townspeople had demanded.

Newspapers had been covering the crisis for weeks, but the news of the violence created a sensation when it moved quickly across the telegraph wires. Newspaper editions were rushed out with startling accounts of the confrontation. The New York Evening World published a special extra edition with the headline: "AT WAR: Pinkertons and Workers Fight at Homestead."

Six steelworkers had been killed in the fighting, and would be buried in the following days. As the people in Homestead held funerals, Henry Clay Frick, in a newspaper interview, announced that he would have no dealings with the union."

120 years later, and the same greed is prevailent in Neo-Conservative circles. A vote for Romney is the single stupidest thing a person could do just as the economy is starting to sputter back to life after a decade long second Great Depression once again created by Republicans.

If you're wondering why I frequently compare Republicans to Nazi's...

Trade Unions and Nazi Germany

When Hitler came to power in January 1933, he saw trade unions as exercising more power over the workers than he could. Therefore, trade unions were seen as a challenge to be dispensed with. Hitler knew that he needed the workers to be on his side but he could not allow trade unions to exert the potential power they had. Therefore, trade unions were banned in Nazi Germany and the state took over the role of looking after the working class.

Just months after Hitler was appointed Chancellor, he took the decision to end trade unions in Nazi Germany. On May 2nd, 1933, police units occupied all trade unions headquarters and union officials and leaders were arrested. The funds that belonged to the trade unions – effectively this was workers money – were confiscated. However, Hitler had to be careful. He had only been in power for a few months and there were many members of the working class he had to deal with. If the working class movement in Germany organised itself, it would have presented the new Chancellor with a lot of major issues that would have to be dealt with. Removing trade union leaders helped this but it did not fully guarantee that the working class would ‘behave’ itself. Hitler had to offer the workers something more. Hitler announced that the German Labour Force, headed by Robert Ley, would replace all trade unions and would look after the working class. The title was chosen carefully. The new organisation was deliberately cloaked in patriotism, as it was now a German entity as was seen in its title. The working class was now a ‘labour force’. The Nazi Party did all that it could to ensure the workers felt that they were better off under the guidance of the Nazi Party via the German Labour Front.

They had to be brought onto the side of the Nazis as Hitler had major plans for the workers. There were simply too many of them to brutalise into submission, so the workers were offered the ‘Strength Through Joy’ movement (Kraft durch Freude’) which offered them subsidised holidays, cheap theatre trips etc.

Hitler offered the working class an improved leisure life in one hand and took away their traditional rights in the other. Strikes – the traditional way for the working class to vent their anger over an issue – were banned. Strikes had been a thorn in the side of Weimar Germany in its final years. In 1928, the equivalent of 20,339,000 days had been lost as a result of strikes. In 1930, 4,029,000 days had been lost. In 1933, it was just 96,000 days and from 1934 to 1939 there were none. New laws had been brought in after the burning down of the Reichstag and one covered ‘un-German activities’ and strikes were classed as un-German. In January 1934, the Law Regulating National Labour (the ‘Charter of Labour’) banned strikes at statute level.

Trade unions had looked after the rights of the working class. The German Labour Front now did this. However, Hitler was still fearful of large group of unemployed men existing in the fledgling Nazi state. In January 1933, he inherited an unemployment rate of 26.3%. This had the potential for long-term trouble. Therefore, job creation schemes were introduced. An individual had no choice about a job placement as anyone labelled ‘work shy’ was sent to prison. But such an approach brought down unemployment figures. By 1936, it had dropped to 8.3% - an 18% fall. Between 1936 and 1939, this 8.3% would be mopped up by conscription. Also women were no longer included in employment/unemployment figures, so the figure had to tumble.

Those brought into the Labour Front to participate in job creation schemes were regimented almost as much as if they were in the military. A song sung by members of the GFL went as follows:

“We demand from ourselves service to the end, even when no eyes are upon us.

Their conditions of work and pay were controlled and determined by the German Labour Front and the GLF represented the workers when disputes arose between management and workers. Between 1933 and 1939, the wages paid out to those in the GLF actually dropped a little. The cost of living rose during the same time by 25%. However, Hitler’s grip on the working class by 1939 was so great that they had no choice but to continue in this way.

Nothing wrong with hating big companies that screw the little guy and make ungodly amounts of money doing it. I'm fine with rich, big companies if they don't do that. But unfortunately many of them do. Why would anyone stand by getting screwed, at the pump or anywhere else?

I'm curious as to what companies you define as ' screwing the little guy ' .

Companies like GE that pay no tax, give massive amounts to the Democratic party , and who's CEO is Obama's ' Job Czar ' ?

Companies like GM who took millions of ' little guys ' money to save itself , only to be worth 1/2 what is was worth and now builds 7 of every 10 cars OUT of this country ?

Companies like that ? .. Then I can agree with you.

But... didn't big companies like that help get your hero in chief elected ???

I want to know what happens in the world, not "what some dopey candidate said in some debate or other and why he's all wrong".

If the dopey candidate wins the election, it will have severe repercussions around the world. Just wait a few months if Romney gets elected. It won't be pretty. I guarantee he will screw up worse than Bush.

I see pedro2 didn't comment on my historically accurate post that depicts the same things going on then that are going on now with the same greedy corpoations and their Republican blank checkbook.

I happen to think that the people that work for oil companies are far superior in intelligence than any person in any government and if you did your homework , Ronny , excuse me , Ronald ,you would find that this government takes in much more , via taxes , than the oil company does.

I would rather have someone knowledgeable about energy spending his / her money , with a plan for the future than a half wit political idiot who only worries about his re-election.

It's the same old crap you used to spin about Hallaburton . What you never mentioned was this > There were two companies that bid on the contract for the US government. Only two . One bowed out and that only left Hallaburton. Maybe you would have liked to see that contract voided ? I'm sure you can find lots of military people that would agree with you .

Spacebro , I also note that you have never answered my questions on voter fraud , racists on the dems side or the recent Lybia scandal that I asked you about.

De Beers diamonds fucked over the people of Sierra Leone.A ten year civil war funded by the company resulted in mutilations and amputations. Warlords were hired to use gangs to keep the workers in line by any means neccessary.

I happen to think that the people that work for oil companies are far superior in intelligence than any person in any government and if you did your homework , Ronny , excuse me , Ronald ,you would find that this government takes in much more , via taxes , than the oil company does.

I would rather have someone knowledgeable about energy spending his / her money , with a plan for the future than a half wit political idiot who only worries about his re-election.

It's the same old crap you used to spin about Hallaburton . What you never mentioned was this > There were two companies that bid on the contract for the US government. Only two . One bowed out and that only left Hallaburton. Maybe you would have liked to see that contract voided ? I'm sure you can find lots of military people that would agree with you .

Spacebro , I also note that you have never answered my questions on voter fraud , racists on the dems side or the recent Lybia scandal that I asked you about.

Who cares anyway , right ?

Pedro, did you notice that I was talking about oil companies, not the government? I was talking about unrelenting, damaging greed. If you're interested in excusing oil companies and demonizing every person who works in govt., that's ok by me. But it doesn't really respond to what I was saying. Parenthetically, I'd guess that the intelligence level between the two is about the same. They're both just American workers, at the top or bottom. You shouldn't let your dislike of govt cloud your judgment.

As for Halliburton, I don't remember talking about them in the past, but maybe I did and don't remember. I purposefully didn't lump them in with the oil companies because Halliburton is a different animal. It gets a lot of it's biillions from the govt., which was originally our - the taxpayers - money. Not to mention Cheney's connection.... Not the same as the oil companies.

Maybe the govt. takes in more in taxes than the oil companies take in in profits, you might be right. I have not idea what those numbers would be. But this sounds like you are working a false equivalency between the two. The govt. takes revenues to pay for services and the oil companies take revenues to get rich. I'm not defending either, since I know tax dollars are often spent horribly.

Ronald , I don't understand how you can talk about government and not include oil companies.Many , many countries on this rock have economies based on the natural resources the hold the deed to. You will never get rid of big bad oil companies or the lobbyists that sway bills in their favor. Talk about unrelenting, damaging greed, look at most governments in the world.

Do oil companies make big money ? You bet they do , but I also like to think that they are exploring many different alternatives to oil with that money. What energy company wouldn't want to be the leader of a new source ? Think of the money they could make !

That's why I'm not as cynical as you of energy producers. I happen to think that engineers are more qualified to explore new energy than our government. At least they do it with their own money , unlike the taxpayer funded failures like Solyndra and the others that have failed.

One question. If , as it seems , you want to restrict the profits of the oil companies , who will you go after next ? Would you want to end the marketplace and free enterprise ?

On the Haliburton subject , Chenney was long gone when that contract was in place , much like Romney was gone from Bain when all the dirt some libs try to imply , was happening.Old talking points.

I want to know what happens in the world, not "what some dopey candidate said in some debate or other and why he's all wrong".

It is quite booring.I voted by mail 3 days ago. I read some pamplets,watched some of the political news,ate some Cheetos then based my choice KUlll's straight to the couch approach.Actually it was quite fun.I line itemezed/veteo everything I didn't like and yup,I strucketh it down with broad strokes of my quivering quil of a pen.Then I write in who I think can do the job and not the one's that want it nessecerally.I've voted this way for alot a cycles and no one seems to mind.Think about it......I fill in all the dots too....shh...

BTW: I love "dopey candidates" makes me think of Cheech and Chong flix and the whole ilk just quacks me up. Being ilks and all.Dopey candidates are funny. Dopey candidates are like rolly-polly fish heads you eat them up yum!

( Both candidates could use a *joint session* asap.)

BBP,you're not here so why do you get our debates over there? I agree with you but I don't see how it would effect you? Is it a Europeon infection also,or just debates

One question. If , as it seems , you want to restrict the profits of the oil companies , who will you go after next ? Would you want to end the marketplace and free enterprise ?

Whoa, hold on cowboy. You need to take a remedial reading course… I haven't said anything about restricting profits. I'm fine with profits out the wazoo. Profits are good. I only object to the sickening level of predation in regards to how the profits are made.

_________________Everytime we picked a booger we'd flip it on this one winduh. Every night we'd contribute, 2, 3, 4 boogers. We had to use a putty knife, man, to get them damn things off the winduh. There was some goober ones that weren't even hard...

Who is online

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum